In this paper the decision as to which four-ball-best-ball (4BBB) pair(s) should be selected by a club is considered. The proposition that a club should select its best pair(s) is considered. Although this is most often the case, it is shown to be not necessarily valid. The case in which the two pairs from club X play one match each against club Y is considered, as is the case with both pairs from club X playing both pairs from club Y ('reverse' matches). It is shown that the pairs best suited to represent the club can depend on the charcteristics of the pairs in the other club. For example, pairs likely to perform best when playing a 'stronger' club can be different from pairs likely to perform best when playing a 'weaker' club. When playing a club of similar standard, it is shown that it is typically best to pairs the players so as to 'balance' their 4BBB ability. Further, it is shown that, in order to maximise the likelihood of correctly identifiying the better team, a match that is tied after 18 holes is best left as a tied match, rather than having a play-off. Statistics from the 2006 PGA Tour, are used to identiy four players who might have represented the US in 2006. The characteristics of these top players suggest that their performances on the par 5 holes can be more important than on the other holes. Information on players' performances on par 3, par 4 and par 5 holes ( along with those of their opponents) is sufficient to determine the better of the two pairs against an opponent pair. That is, it is not necessary to do a full 18 holes analysis of such a match.